The pitcher delivers. The ball lands in the catcher’s mitt just an inch off of home plate. The umpire calls a strike, prompting the hitter to double-tap his helmet. Then, the jumbotron displays a screen depicting the exact location of the ball relative to the strike zone, which was previously determined by a sophisticated system of cameras. The pitch was, indeed, off the plate, and the call is overturned.
This is Major League Baseball’s (MLB) Automated Ball-Strike Challenge System (ABS), which allows pitchers, catchers and hitters to challenge balls and strikes, a previously unprecedented, albeit desired, feature in baseball.
Initially tested in lower levels of professional baseball starting in 2019, MLB officially implemented ABS for all games starting in the 2026 season.
It seemed like a great addition to the sport, especially for players like Kyle Schwarber and Jake Mangum, who had suffered from notoriously bad calls. With the addition of the ABS, they would not have to worry about being penalized for the umpire’s mistakes. Additionally, due to the teams only being allowed two unsuccessful challenges per game, ABS introduced a new strategic element to the game.
However, the new robotic system did not sit well with everybody.
Opponents threw out all kinds of arguments, ranging from the loss of the human element in officiating to the death of pitch-framing, which some heralded as an “art.”
The fact is, the implementation of technology in any job originally held by humans will generate controversy, regardless of whether or not it improves accuracy or efficiency. Technology has improved sports and will continue to do so as it moves forward.
Baseball is just one example of a sport that has made the move to “robots” in officiating. Sports like tennis have automated line calling, and instant replay is present in many sports like football.
Despite complaints from traditionalist fans, the truth is that technology improves the fairness of sports games. When players and fans cannot expect a consistent, reliable official, the sports experience becomes worse for everyone, especially when blown calls have large consequences, not just for players, but for fans who participate in sports betting. A single blown call can translate into the loss of hundreds of dollars and a playoff game.
It is true that technology has limitations. If replay analysis was used for every single play, the pace of most sports would slow down incredibly. For example, in the 2022 MLB season, the average challenge took one minute and 31 seconds. After just 10 plays, the amount of time added by review analysis would exceed 15 minutes. In fast-paced sports, constant robot reviews would ruin the viewing experience for fans. Also, when sports get heated and players and coaches start to get into physical altercations, a neutral human force is often necessary, and that force will not be present if “robot officials” completely replace people.
However, technology also negates problems that arise with human officials. For example, blown calls are not always mistakes. Officials play a large part in determining the outcomes of games, which they can — and have — leveraged to their own benefit by cooperating with others to bet on games they are officiating. That kind of conduct is absolutely unacceptable, especially from officials at the highest level of professional sports. In the end, bad officials are not just nuisances; they hinder athletes’ ability to perform their job. Some problems with human officials simply lie in their nature.
Uncontrollable factors like fatigue impact human umpires and referees. No such problem exists with technology. The outcome of any sporting event should always be determined by the talent, skill and hustle of the athletes involved, never by the bias or incompetence of an official. Fans and players deserve to watch cleanly officiated games every time.
Yet, some still argue that human officials, whether they are good or bad, are part of the game, especially in more “traditional” American sports like baseball and football. There is a degree of truth to that claim. Blown calls, particularly in big stages like playoff games, have turned into iconic moments that live rent-free in the minds of many fans across the nations. Some examples include Armando Galarraga’s near-perfect game, a non-call in a 2018 National Football League (NFL) playoff game and a dropped-third strike call in Game 2 of the 2005 American League Championship Series. Calls like these may sting at the moment, but they create memories that will last and stories that will be passed down through generations of sports fans. Sports live on storylines, and nothing produces storylines like infamous blown calls.
Nevertheless, this is no reason to reject technology in sports. Ultimately, the fairness of a game is much more important. The fact that missed calls produce iconic moments does not mean that they should keep happening. In areas like law, incorrect court rulings are historically memorable, but are seen negatively, and rightfully so. Why should it be any different for sports? If technology improves the game in any way, it should be implemented. When blown calls lead to ended seasons and lost games, the claim that they create “lore” becomes a trivial matter.
In contrast, individual, Olympic-style sports like figure skating and taekwondo would benefit from even more implementation of technology. Officiating these sports requires a high degree of precision and focus that human officials cannot readily provide. Although human judgment is important as well, it is best that the small margins of error are kept in the hands of a “robot.”
Technology may take some elements away from sports, but it also takes away one its most glaring problems. Technological advancements are inevitable; those who refuse to adapt and evolve to the changing technological landscape will be left behind.
